Directors who dont direct? Bound to be some of those, and there should be a mechanism for their removal. The angst is not just on here, its there, if only as an undercurrent at most matches, evidenced by the obvious disagreement exhibited at prize givings! Never have so many shoulders been shrugged, or heads shaken upon hearing the awards.
There has always been a group who disagree with the results, but they are now approaching majority status, and that is going to lead to problems, one of which could be matches becoming bereft of judges. That may not be all bad, ploughmen would then have to judge the work and would find it hard to disagree with any result!
Whilst I honestly admire your dogged determination, i cant help but be amazed by your naievety. Your knowledge of the workings of the SOP are clouded both by your dream and possibly your landlord.
The executive is a self elected self propagating body.
The executive co-opts at will whosoever they see fit.
The members have no say whatsoever as to who is on the executive.
The members have no say whatsoever in what the executive does.
Whilst the exective alegedy run the society on behalf of the directors this is incorrect. Moves are in place by the executive to reduce the rank of director to committee member. Lets not forget that once recent connivance by the executive had been legalised, 5 directors were sacked.
Whilst the situation is of no immediate concern to those of us who have walked / been sent away, ultimately it all percolates down to grass roots level.
Just one small point of which I am sure you have been advised of many times, is that your stance of devils advocate for both sides simultaneously, does little other than cause confusion.
Last edited: